Effect of the subjective intensity of fatigue and interoception on perceptual regulation and performance during ...activity, 2022, Greenhouse-Tucknott

Discussion in 'Other health news and research' started by Trish, Oct 13, 2023.

  1. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    52,531
    Location:
    UK
    Effect of the subjective intensity of fatigue and interoception on perceptual regulation and performance during sustained physical activity
    • Aaron Greenhouse-Tucknott ,
    • Jake B. Butterworth,
    • James G. Wrightson,
    • Neil A. Harrison,
    • Jeanne Dekerle
    Abstract
    Background
    The subjective experience of fatigue impairs an individual’s ability to sustain physical endurance performance. However, precise understanding of the specific role perceived fatigue plays in the central regulation of performance remains unclear. Here, we examined whether the subjective intensity of a perceived state of fatigue, pre-induced through prior upper body activity, differentially impacted performance and altered perceived effort and affect experienced during a sustained, isometric contraction in lower body. We also explored whether (cardiac) interoception predicted the intensity of experienced perceptual and affective responses and moderated the relationships between constructs during physical activity.

    Methods
    Using a repeated-measures study design, thirty male participants completed three experimental conditions, with the intensity of a pre-induced state of fatigue manipulated to evoke moderate (MOD), severe (SEV) and minimal (control; CON) intensity of perceptions prior to performance of the sustained contraction.

    Results
    Performance of the sustained contraction was significantly impaired under a perceived state of fatigue, with reductions of 10% and 14% observed in the MOD and SEV conditions, respectively. Performance impairment was accompanied by greater perceived effort and more negative affective valence reported during the contraction. However, effects were limited to comparisons to CON, with no difference evident between the two experimental trials (i.e. MOD vs. SEV). Individuals’ awareness of their accuracy in judging resting heartbeats was shown to predict the subjective intensity of fatigue experienced during the endurance task. However, interoception did not moderate the relationships evident between fatigue and both perceived effort and affective valence.

    Conclusions
    A perceived state of fatigue limits endurance performance, influencing both how effortful activity is perceived to be and the affective experience of activity. Though awareness of interoceptive representations of bodily states may be important to the subjective experience of fatigue, interoception does not modulate the relationships between perceived fatigue and other perceptual (i.e. effort) and affective constructs.
     
    duncan and Peter Trewhitt like this.
  2. Lou B Lou

    Lou B Lou Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    468
    Conclusions
    'A perceived state of fatigue limits endurance performance, influencing both how effortful activity is perceived to be and the affective experience of activity. Though awareness of interoceptive representations of bodily states may be important to the subjective experience of fatigue, interoception does not modulate the relationships between perceived fatigue and other perceptual (i.e. effort) and affective constructs.'


    Can Anyone make sense of that?
     
    duncan and Peter Trewhitt like this.
  3. Trish

    Trish Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    52,531
    Location:
    UK
    This was on healthy male participants. The did a knee extension exercise and rated their effort while doing it. They did it 3 times on different days, with one time as the control, and the other 2 with immediately preceding hand grip exercise to make them feel fatigued before they did the knee extensions.

    The idea seems to be if you make people feel fatigued by exercising one part of the body, it makes doing an exercise on another part of the body immediately afterwards seem more of an effort and fail sooner. Making the preliminary hand grip exercise moderate or severe level of difficulty didn't make a difference to the knee exercise.

    From the discussion:

    So they are saying the results of their study indicate that the mechanism is cognitive rather than neural or biochemical.
    Then a very long paragraph I've added breaks to for easier reading that mentions chronic pathological fatigue, so might be of interest to ME.
     
    Lou B Lou, Peter Trewhitt and duncan like this.
  4. rvallee

    rvallee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    12,535
    Location:
    Canada
    Not much to do with that, unfortunately. It can mostly be summed as: medicine has no idea what fatigue is or how to define it, and that's the state we are still in.

    They tried comparing 'interoception' ability, defined as being able to match perception of heart beat, with fatigue perception. I don't know how that's any relevant, being able to feel one's heart beat does not translate to the full experience of interoception. So this part is pretty much useless, even though it's basically the go-to for everything psychosomatic. There are so many variables that can influence this sensation, and it's such a tiny part of the whole sensory experience.

    There is one element that may be of some use, and it's that even with fatigue at its heaviest, objective performance only drops by a maximum of 14%. In healthy people. In this one experiment. For sure the drop in performance for us is massively larger than this, but this makes fatigue especially difficult to study objectively when the differences are so small in actual objective performance. In fact there isn't a strong match between perceived fatigue and actual performance, which makes sense given such a tiny window of difference.

    They seem to have a definition of fatigue that is mostly behavioral/motivational, so this is also too reductive and limited in scope. People can be worked to death, in fact routinely are. Especially under threat. They won't perform well, but if the difference is rather small, then it still works out with a large number of people. They are trying to reduce systemic concepts down to single elements but they can't study them in isolation, so it makes no sense at all.

    Studies like this make about as much sense as trying to understand quantum mechanics using beakers of liquids in the 17th century. They just don't have the basic knowledge and technology to do anything more than speculate and do very crude experiments. Didn't stop people back then from being convinced they knew almost everything that could ever be known. That is one thing that never changes.
     
  5. duncan

    duncan Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    1,610
    This made me think of one of those curious perception tricks, but with eyesight, where you have two identical crescent moon shapes stacked upon one another. One looks bigger than the other. Our perception is fooled.

    It's a cool trick, but it has absolutely zero utility in helping diagnose or treat someone with cataracts or failing eyesight.

    It's just sleight of hand. It can be amusing, but it needs to be remembered what its real implications are limited to.
     
  6. Sean

    Sean Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    7,251
    Location:
    Australia
    Love how they are trying to frame this as a new idea, when it is exactly the same basic idea (disrupted interoception) the BPS club have been flogging for decades about ME/CFS, with the FND club getting in on the act more recently.

    In other words, they have no solid empirical basis for it, so its narrative time!
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2023

Share This Page